The plaintiffs, the parties to the selection, the designated parties, and the defendant E (hereinafter referred to as "the defendants") are co-owners of the real estate listed in the attached Table (hereinafter referred to as "the real estate of this case"), and their co-ownership shares are as listed in the attached Table list of co-owners.

The Plaintiffs and the Defendants did not reach an agreement on the method of dividing the said real estate.

(Reasons for recognition) Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 through 3, the purport of the whole pleadings.

Judgment

The Plaintiffs, co-owners of the instant real estate, may file a claim against the Defendants, other co-owners of the instant real estate, to divide the instant real estate.

Furthermore, in view of the following circumstances, i.e., the number of co-owners of the instant real estate to 17 persons, i.e., the total number of co-owners of the instant real estate, and the area of the part adjoining the road among the instant real estate, which is neither a dispute between the parties nor a dispute between the parties, and recognized pursuant to the overall purport of the evidence and the pleading, there is a grave that some co-owners manage the instant real estate, and the area of the part adjoining the road among the said real estate is smaller, it is deemed that the value of the portion to be owned by the instant real estate would be significantly reduced than the value of the share ownership before the partition.

(See Supreme Court Decision 98Da51169 delivered on March 9, 2001). Accordingly, the real estate of this case is sold to an auction and the remainder after deducting the auction cost from the sale price is divided according to the share of co-ownership.

In conclusion, the instant real estate is sold by auction.